Labels

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Rates of Dearness Allowance applicable w.e.f. 1.1.2014 to employees of Central Government and Central Autonomous Bodies

No.1(3)/2008-E.II(B)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure

North Block, New Delhi
Dated: 22nd April, 2014.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Rates of Dearness Allowance applicable w.e.f. 1.1.2014 to employees of Central Government and Central Autonomous Bodies continuing to draw their pay In the pre-revised scale as per 5th Central Pay Commission.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s O.M. of even No. dated 7th October, 2013 revising the rates of Dearness Allowance in respect of employees of Central Government and Central Autonomous Bodies who continue to draw their pay and allowances in the pre-revised scales of pay as per 5th Central Pay Commission.

2. The rates of Dearness Allowance admissible to the above categories of employees of Central Government and Central Autonomous bodies shall be enhanced from the existing rate of 183% to 200% w.e.f. 1.1.2014. All other conditions as laid down in the O.M. of even number dated 3rd October, 2008 will continue to apply.

3. The contents of this Office Memorandum may also be brought to the notice of the organizations under the administrative control of the Ministries/Departments which have adopted the Central Government scales of pay.

sd/-
(Subhash Chand)
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India

Source:www.finmin.nic.in

Continue Reading »

Mobile and Desktop APP on Windows 8.0 for National Train Enquiry System (NTES) Commenced

A new mobile app and desktop app on Windows 8 platform for train enquiry as an enhancement to National Train Enquiry System (NTES) has been developed by Centre for Railway Information Systems (CRIS), the IT wing of Indian Railways in consultation with and support from Microsoft. NTES is the backend system which provides information to the public about train running on near real time basis through various interfaces like nationwide unique rail enquiry number 139, website (www.trainenquiry.com), mobile interfaces, Touch Screens, face to face enquiry and Display Boards at stations. The NTES app is now available for download and public use from today onwards i.e. 23rd April 2014. As the first step the App has been started for Windows 8.0 and subsequently the app will be developed for other mobile platforms.

A new interface of NTES website along with Mobile version was launched in September 2013 earlier which received wide appreciation by the travelling public and has been quite useful in meeting the requirements of passengers.

A strong need was felt for launching the mobile app with richer user interface keeping in view the current technology trends and which can be downloaded on the device and comfortably made use for train running related enquiries.

·  To download the app, go to windows store and search for NTES app. App will be listed. Select NTES app and click to install.

·   Link  also has been provided on NTES website (www.trainenquiry.com andenquiry.indianrail.gov.in) to download the app.

The current Mobile application has the following main features:-

“Spot your train” - This query offers information about a train. Current running status, expected time of arrival/expected time of departure (ETA/ETD) at the queried station can be easily known through this query.
“Live Station” - This query has been given to replicate the display boards at station. One can see the trains expected to arrive/depart at any station in next 2 or 4 hours.

“Train Schedule”-This provides complete schedule of a train with all public stoppages enroute and schedule arrival/departure at the station, distance and day count.

“Trains between Stations” - One can find out the list of all types of trains available between any two stations over Indian Railways.

“Cancelled Trains”  - This query displays all trains marked as cancelled on Indian Railways. The option displays trains which are cancelled through entire route as well as trains which are cancelled on partial route
.
“Rescheduled Trains” -This query displays all trains marked as rescheduled on Indian Railways. The option displays trains’ rescheduled timings.

“Diverted Trains” – This query displays all trains marked as diverted on Indian Railways.
CRIS, has constantly been involved in taking new initiatives and developing various applications for Railway users and interfaces for general public to provide quality information about train running and other services with enhanced user experiences. Member Traffic, Railway Board, Shri D.P.Pandey while reviewing the IT projects with MD/CRIS and other officers of Railway Board and CRIS on 22nd April, 2014 appreciated the Mobile app developed by CRIS and expressed his hope that the app will be well received by mobile users and will certainly add great value to the services.

Source:pib
Continue Reading »

Excess pay given due to dept mistake cannot be recovered from

Madras High Court today said that if excess pay was granted to an employee due to the mistake of the department and not due to any misrepresentation by him, that amount shall not be recovered from the worker from the retiral benefits, that too after retirement.

Allowing a petition from K Syed Razack, a retired Police Inspector, Justice D Hariparanthaman set aside the order of the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, to recover Rs 36,312 from the DCRG (Death-Cum-Retirement Gratuity) of the petitioner.

He directed the authorities not to make any recovery on the ground of any wrong fixation done during the service, as it was not the petitioner's mistake.

The judge also directed that the amount be refunded if any already recovered from the petitioner within six weeks.

Razack submitted he was appointed Grade-II constable on June 1, 1971. After two promotions, he was listed in 'C' list of head constables fit for promotion to Sub-Inspector's post on Sep 22, 1985. As there was no vacancy, he was not promoted at that time.

Later, he was promoted temporarily as SI on September 15, 1987 and also paid salary by fixing his pay to the post. He was regularised in the post with effect from August 17 1992, promoted as Inspector on October 15,2003 and retired from service on January 31, 2009.

When the pension proposals were sent, the Accountant General opined that the benefit of fixation was given from September 15, 1987 and should be given only from the date of regularisation of service (August 7, 1992).

The CoP then passed an order to recover Rs 36,312 from the DCRG of Razack towards alleged excess payment due to the fixation.

Citing a judgment of a division bench, which held such recovery was bad, the judge said he was also of the view that the judgement applies to the facts of this particular case.

"Any wrong fixation that was said to have been made in 1987 shall not be sought to be recovered, after retirement in 2009, more particularly, when it is not the case of the authorities that the wrong fixation was done at the instance of the petitioner by way of misrepresentation."

"Even, if there was any error, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer after retirement, by way of recovery," the judge said.

Source:http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/excess-pay-given-due-to-dept-mistake-cannot-be-recovered-from-114041801014_1.html
Continue Reading »

Computation of reservation — Implementation of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme court in the matter of Union of India & Anr. Vs. National Federation of Blind & Ors.

Immediate
Court Matter
No.36012/24/2009-Estt.(Res.)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Pubic Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel and Training
North Block, New Delhi
Dated the 17th April, 2014
OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub: Computation of reservation — Implementation of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme court in the matter of Union of India & Anr. Vs. National Federation of Blind & Ors.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s OM. of even no. dated 20.03.2014 regarding judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court pronounced on 08.10.2013 in the matter of Civil Appeal No.9096 of 2013 (arising out of SLP(civil) No.7541 of 2009 titled Union of India & Anr. Vs. National Federation of Blind & Ors. and this Department’s O.M. of even no. dated 03.12.2013.

2. The Ministries/Departments/Organisations of the Government of India were requested to furnish data on vacancies available and posts identified for persons with disabilities in all the cadres under their control, including attached offices, subordinate offices, public sector undertakings/Government companies, cantonment board and the services under their administrative control so that consolidated Status Report could be filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi before the next date of hearing on 28.04.2014.

3. The Ministries/Departments who have already furnished requisite information may furnish data in regard to the Services, if any, which are being administered by them.

sd/-
(Debabrata Das)
Under Secretary to the Govt. of India

Source: http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02adm/36012_24_2009-Estt-Res.pdf
Continue Reading »

Correlation of Piece Work rates on implementation of 6th CPC Pay Scales -OFB

Instruction No. 3408/A/A

834/PWCR/A/A
Government of India 
Ministry of Defence 
Ordnance Factory Board 
10A, S.K.Bose Road 
Kolkata- 700 001

Dated: 22/04/2014
To

The Sr. General Manager/General Manager
Ordnance & Ordnance Equipment Factories

Sub: Correlation of Piece Work rates on implementation of 6th CPC Pay Scales

Ref: OFB Instruction of no. 3400/A/A dated 11th March 2014

In continuation of OFB Instruction referred above, with reference to para no. 4.0 of OFB Instruction No. 1372/A/A dated 12-04-1991, the following clarification is issued for payment of incentive bonus to the maintenance workers of Ordnance and Ordnance Equipment Factories in 6th CPC pay scales w.e.f. March 2014:

Since the piece work rates for all categories/grades of workers are correlated at Rs. 7100/- in the e CPC pay scales w.e.f. march, 2014 essential maintenance workers covered under MoD letter No. 754/A/A/1623/11/D(Fy-I) dated 31-07-1972 may be paid incentive bonus at the rate of 50% of the average piece work profit percentage, earned by piece workers in the particular production shop or the whole factory as the case may be. This will calculated as follows :

7100XNo. of days+7100XTotal No. of OT Hrs workedX50% of the average
PW profit % of the
production section
 or of the whole
factory as the case
may be
N-(S+H)200

Where, N= Total number of days
S= No. of Sundays
H=No. of Holidays

(Arti C. Srivastava)
Director/Admin

Source: http://bpms.org.in/documents/admin_pwcr-wov2.pdf
Continue Reading »

7th CPC QUESTIONNAIRE-BPS VIEWS AND SUGGESTIONS ON NPS,PENSION,OROP AND FMA

Bharat Pensioners Samaj Draft Reply to 7th CPC questionnaire for comments & Suggestions

Ms Meena Agarwal
Secretary  GOI Seventh  Central Pay Commission
Post Box No 4599 Hause Khas
P.O. New Delhi -110016
e.mail: secy-7cpc@nic.in

Madam,

Subject: 7th Questionnaire

Reference: D.O. No 7cpc/15/questionnaire   dated 9th April 2014

‘Bharat Pensioners Samaj’. One of the identified Pensioners Federation by GOI  M/O Personnel,  PG & Pensions-DOPPW and a stake holder. In its capacity as one of the oldest &  largest  Pensioners Organization with over 500 Affiliated associations, submits here under reply to items Nos 10.1 &  10.1.2 under the head ‘Pension’ in the questionnaire
However, as Pension is not independent of Salary suggestions for basic structure are for Salary/Pension.

Item No 10.1 New pension Scheme i.e The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 are covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?

Withdraw New Pension Scheme: for following reasons:
(i) Pension of Govt. employees is a deferred wage. Since wage paid out to them during the course of work tenure is kept low by design, to cater for pension.
(ii) He/She forgoes with interest 8.33% of govt. matching contribution to PF.
(iii) Pension is a social security measure & cannot be subjected in any way to Market risks (iii) It does not guarantee minimum return & thus lacks the basic fiber of Social Security Scheme (iv). It is in no way better than the existing Scheme (vi)It does not provide guaranteed Family Pension to dependents & disabled siblings which exist in present scheme, even in case of spouse & dependent parents where death of the employee occur in early years of service there is no adequate social security.

Item 10.1.2  i.e.  As for as pre 2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and retirement benefits?

Basic structure of Pay/ Pension

1. Keeping in view the Socialistic structure of the country , constitutional provisions & to reduce vast  inequality between have & have lots, it is proposed:  The Ratio between maximum & minimum of Salary/ Pension be brought down to  9:1. Ensuring uniformly equal rise in Salary/Pension of all employees/pensioners, irrespective of pre- retiral status. By adopting common multiplication factor for revision of Pension/Pay, as raising the ratio between minimum & maximum of salary/pension to 1:12.85 by 6thCPC  , instead of reducing it,  was  unconstitutional .

In order to cater to the need of talent attraction in all cadres 7th pay commission is requested to  first workout the top most revised salary/pension, divide it by 9 to arrive at the minimum revised salary & then derive a uniform multiplication factor  by dividing minimum of revised Salary/Pension by minimum of pre-revised salary/Pension for  revision of  Pay & Pension with the condition that Pension shall not in any case be less than 65% & family Pension 45% of the last Pay  in Pay Band i.e. Pay in Pay Band+ GP  /Pay scale or of average of last 10 months emoluments (Whichever is more beneficial) as was worked out & recommended by TECS (Tata Economic Consultancy Services)  consultant to Vth CPC (Para 127.9 Vol III 5th CPC report)

2.One Rank one pension: ‘Justice must be equal for all’. Otherwise, it breeds contempt, discontentment, inefficiency, corruption & finally the insurgency. We have seen it happening in Tribal areas of N.E, Chhatishgarh, Jharkand, Orisa, MP etc.

Vast inequality of income and wealth between lowest & the highest paid, violation of Article 14 has already induced contempt, discontent, inefficiency & corruption, in Civil services.

Govt. granted One Rank One Pension (OROP) to Armed forces, Judges granted it to themselves even a period of private practice of lawyer judges, to be counted towards qualifying service. Higher Bureaucracy got it through modified parity.   All other Central Govt. employees & Pensioners are definitely not the 2nd grade citizens!  One Rank one Pension to all retirees is constitutional requirement to ensure equality.

Defence Pensioners:  As far as Armed forces are concerned they do the supreme sacrifice for the country & must be the highest paid .For them the ratio between highest & lowest paid must not be more than 1:5 and instead of being thrown out at an early age they must be transferred to paramilitary/police force after active tenure in armed forces. Otherwise, if these retired army personnel trained in all sort of weaponry are left uncared, they may fall prey to undesirable anti National outfits. In their case it is also essential that retirees from uniformed cadre & civilian defence Pensioners are treated at Par for all purpose

2.Dearness relief : 100% neutralization with automatic Merger with Pension whenever it goes to 50%  :The Pension of Central Government Pensioners undergo revision only once in 10 years during which period the pension structure gets seriously dis-aligned; 50% increase in price takes place even in less than 5 years. This results in considerable erosion of the financial position of the pensioner. DR does not adequately take care of inflation at this level. Working employees are getting automatic relief by way of 25% increase in their allowances with every 50% rise in Dearness Allowance. As pensioners do not get any allowances, they feel discriminated against. In order to strike a balance, DR may be automatically merged with Pension whenever it goes to 50% .

3.Additional old age Pension :  5% upward enhancement in pension be granted every five years’  after the age of 60 years & upto 80 years & thereafter as per existing dispensation.       As in the present scenario of climatic changes, incidence of pesticides and rising pollution old age disabilities/diseases set in by the time an employee retires and go on manifesting very fast, needing additional finances to take care of these disabilities and diseases, especially as the cost of health care has gone very high.

4. Pension to be net of Income Tax :  The purchase value of pension gets reduced day by day due to continuously high inflation and steep rise in cost of food items and medical facilities. Retired persons/Senior citizens do not enjoy fully public goods and services provided by Government for citizens due to lack of mobility and many other factors. Their ability to pay tax gets reduced from year to year after retirement due to ever-increasing expenditure on food and medicines and other incidentals. Their net worth at year end gets reduced considerably as compared to the beginning of the year. Inflation, for a pensioner is much more than any tax. It erodes the major part of the already inadequate pension. To enable pensioners, at the far end of their lives, to live in minimum comfort and to cater for ever rising cost of living, they may be spared from paying Income Tax.

5. Restoration of commuted value of Pension in 12 years: Commutation value in respect of employee superannuating at the age of 60 years between 1.1.1996 and 31.12.2005 and commuting a portion of pension within a period of one year would be equal to 9.81 years Purchase. After adding thereto a further period of two years for recovery of interest, in terms of observation of Supreme Court in their judgment in writ petitions No 395-61 of 1983 decided in December 1986, it would be reasonable to restore commuted portion of pension in 12 years instead of present 15 years. In case of persons superannuating at the age of 60 years after 31.12.2005 and seeking commutation within a year, numbers of purchase years have been further reduced to 8.194. Also, the mortality rate of 60 plus Indians has considerably reduced ever since Supreme Court judgment in 1986; the life expectancy  stands at 76 years now. Therefore, restoration of commuted value of Pension after 12 years is fully justified.

6. The 6th Central Pay Commission’s improved benefits, e.g. full pension for 20 years of service/10 years in superannuation cases, last pay drawn or average of last 10 months’ pay whichever is beneficial to the retiring employee as emoluments for computation of pension etc., have been limited only to post-1.1.2006 retirees.  This is in violation of the letter and spirit of Hon’ble Apex Court judgment in Nakara Case.

We appeal to the 7th CPC to extend the above benefits to all pre-1.1.2006 retirees with monetary benefit from 1.1.2006 to do them equal justice. And that new/improved benefits which 7th CPC may recommend, too be made equally applicable to present & past pensioners

7..Medical facilities: “Health is not a luxury” and “not be the sole possession of a privileged few”. It is a Fundamental Right of all present & past Employees!
To ensure hassle free health care facility to Pensioners/family pensioners, Smart Cards be issued irrespective of departments to all Pensioners and their Dependents for cashless medical facilities across the country. These smart cards should be valid in
all Govt. hospitals
all NABH accredited Multi Super Specialty hospitals across the country which have been         allotted land at concessional rate or given any aid or concession by the Central or the State govt.
all CGHS, RELHS & ECHS empanelled hospitals across the country.
Medical attendants. For  reimbursement of bills for treatment & for hospitalization . No referral should be insisted in case of medical emergencies. For the purpose of reference for hospitalization & reimbursement of expenditure thereon in other than emergency cases Doctors/Medical officers working in different Central/State Govt. department dispensaries/health units should be recognized as Authorized medical attendant.

The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is recognized as a fundamental right of all workers in terms of Article 21 read with Article 39(c), 41, 43, 48A and all related Articles as pronounced by the Supreme Court in Consumer Education and Research Centre & Others vs Union of India (AIR 1995 Supreme Court 922) The Supreme court has held that the right to health to a worker is an integral facet of meaningful right to life to have not only a meaningful existence but also robust health and vigour. Therefore, the right to health, medical aid to protect the health and vigour of a worker while in service or post retirement is a fundamental right-to make life of a worker meaningful and purposeful with dignity of person. Thus health care is not only a welfare measure but is a Fundamental Right.

            We suggest that, all the pensioners, irrespective of pre-retiral class and status, be treated as same category of citizens and the same homogenous group. There should be no class or category based discrimination and all must be provided Health care services at par .

8. Hospital Regulatory Authority: To ensure that the hospitals do not avoid providing reasonable care to smart card holders and other poor citizens, a Hospital Regulatory Authority should be created to bring all NABH-accredited hospitals and NABL-accredited diagnostic Labs under its constant monitoring of quality, rates for different procedures & timely bill payments by Govt. agencies and Insurance companies. CGHS rates be revised keeping in mind the workability and market conditions.

9.Fixed Medical allowance (FMA): As is recorded in Para 5 of the minutes of Committee of Secretaries (COS) held on 15.04.2010 (Reference Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan No 502/2/3/2010-C.A.V Doc No. CD (C.A.V) 42/2010 Minutes of COS meeting dated 15.4.2010) which discussed enhancement of FMA: CGHS card estimates for serving Personnel since estimates are not available separately for pensioners M/O Health & Family Welfare had assessed the total cost per card p.a. in 2007-2008 = Rs 16435 i.e. Rs.1369 per month for OPD. Adding to its inflation the figure today is well over Rs 2000/- PM. Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. of India vide its letter no. G-25012/2/2011-SSI dated 07.06.2013 has already enhanced FMA to Rs 2000/- PM for EPFO beneficiaries. Thus, to help elderly pensioners to look after their health, Adequate raise in FMA will encourage a good number of pensioners to opt out of OPD facility which will reduce overcrowding in hospitals. OPD through Insurance will cost much more to the Govt. As such the proposal for raising Fixed Medical allowance to Pensioners is fully justified and is financially viable.

            We suggest that FMA for all C.G. Pensioners be raised to at least Rs 2000/- PM without any distance restriction linking it to Dearness Relief for automatic further increase. We further demand that FMA be exempted from INCOME TAX: Fixed Medical Allowance (FMA) is a compensatory allowance to reimburse the medical expenses. As Medical Reimbursement is not taxable, FMA should also be exempted from Income Tax.

10.Grievance redressal Mechanism: Pensioners/Family Pensioners are exploited, harassed and humiliated by their own counterparts in chair, who at the sight of an old person adopt a wooden face and indifferent attitude. Pensioners do not have representation even in Forums & Committees wherein pension policies and connected matters are discussed. The forum of Pension Adalat too is not of much avail as it meets only once a year which is too long a period for an elderly nearer to his end. Moreover, these Adalats deal with settlement claims only. SCOVA too meets only twice a year for about 3 hours at each occasion. Moreover, the scope of SCOVA is limited to feedback on Government policies. DOP (P&PW) is perceived as a toothless authority which lacks direct Service Delivery Capability. It has been striving over the years to redress the Pensioners’ grievances through the ‘Sevottam’ model of the Department of Administrative Reforms & Public grievances; in the absence of strict timeline with punitive clause it is, however, proving to be a failure. Grievances are either not resolved for years or closed arbitrarily without resolving.

We therefore, appeal that for resolving Pensioners complaints of all pensioners,

(i) A strict time line with punitive clause be introduced in “Sevottam model”
(ii) Grievances are not allowed to be closed without resolving.
(iii) SCOVA be upgraded to JCM level covering all Pensioners by introducing suitable legislative amendment if required.


11. Representations in various committees : As recommended vide Vth CPC report Vol III para 141.30 Pensioners’ representatives should be included in various committees & other Fora of Govt where issues relating to the welfare of pensioners are likely to be discussed &debated: Discussing, debating and deciding the matters / Policies relating to Pensioners, with representatives other than those of pensioners, is unfair & against the Rules of ‘Natural Justice’. At present various Committees like National Anomaly Committee (NAC) and JCM (on Pensioner matters), are there wherein matters / policies relating to pensioners’ welfare are discussed and decided, but they do not have pensioners’ representatives with the result their viewpoints, hardships & anomalies are not properly represented. As pensioners are a homogenous class, there is an urgent need to constitute separate Committees for pensioners wherein matters / policies / anomalies relating to pensioners of all Groups, categories &departments may be discussed.

With regards
Truly Yours,

ER.S.C.Maheshwari
Secy.Genl. Bharat Pensioners Samaj

Copy: Sh.Shiv Gopal Mishra Secretay JCM (Staff side) for necessary favourable action.

S.C.Maheshwari
Secy. Genl. BPS

Source:http://scm-bps.blogspot.in/2014/04/bharat-pensioners-samaj-draft-reply-to.html
Continue Reading »

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Grant of Non-Functional Scale to Section Officers of CSS — Clarification on fixation of pay - regarding,

F. No.5/4/2005-CS-I (S)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
2nd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market 
New Delhi, the 21st April, 2014

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Grant of Non-Functional Scale to Section Officers of CSS — Clarification on fixation of pay - regarding,

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department's OM of even number dated 01.04.2014 on the subject mentioned above and to say that the clarification issued therein was about the manner of fixation of pay of Section Officers of CSS upon granting NFS only.

2. It is emphasized that as per the prevailing instructions, only 'regular' Section Officers of CSS with four years approved service would be considered for grant of NFS subject to DPCNigilance Clearance.

3. The situations and manner under which NFS may be granted are explained in the following illustrations:


Illustration 1:
The case when the person was holding the
post of Section Officer on ad-hoc basis as on the
 1st July of the year in which NFS become due

 SL Year of SO (SQ/LDCE) — 2009
Date of regular promotion — 01.10.2013
Date of grant of NFS with — 01.07.2013
actual benefits
  Illustration 2:
The case when the person was holding the
post of Assistant/PA/PS as on 1st July of
 the year in which NFS become due
SL Year of SO (SQ/LDCE) — 2009
Date of regular promotion — 01.10.2013
Date of grant of NFS
(i) on notional basis - 01.07.2013
(ii) with actual benefits - 01.10.2013


sd/-
(G.C. Rout)
Under Secretary to the Govt. of India

Source:http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02csd/NFS_Clari_210414.pdf
Continue Reading »

Monday, April 21, 2014

7th CPC NEWS – COMPARISON OF 7th CPC AND 6th CPC QUESTIONNAIRE.

SIXTH CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION
Questionnaire 
7th CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION
Questionnaire 
1 Comparison with public/private sectors
1.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between
pay scales and perquisites in Government and the
 public/private sector?

1.2 Is it possible to quantify all other benefits,
 excluding pay, derived by employees in
Government and the public and private sectors
from security of tenure, promotional avenues,
retirement packages, housing and other invisibles?
In view of these benefits, can there be any fair
comparison between the salaries available in the
government
 vis-à-vis the salaries in the private sector?

1.3 In order to ensure a fair comparison based on
 principles of equity and social justice, would it not
also be appropriate to take into account the economic conditions of large sections of the community that are less privileged than Government employees and many of
 whom live below the poverty line?

2. International comparisons
2.1 Some countries have raised civil service pay
 scales almost to levels prevalent in the private
 sector on the hypothesis that a well-paid
 bureaucracy
is likely to be honest and diligent. To what extent
would such a hypothesis be valid and how far would
 such a course of action be desirable?

3. Impact on other organizations
3.1 Salary structure in the Central and State
 Governments is broadly similar. The recommendations
of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar
demands from employees of State Governments,
 municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions

Their paying capacity is considerably limited.
To what extent should this factor be considered in
devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Government employees?

4. Salaries
4.1 How should we determine the salary to be
 paid to a Secretary in the Central Government?
Please suggest an appropriate basic pay for a Secretary?
Can appointment to this post be made on a contractual basis where salaries and tenure are linked to the performance in terms of achieving defined targets?

4.2 What should be the reasonable ratio between the
minimum and the maximum of a pay scale?

4.3 Is it necessary to persist with a pre-determined
minimum-maximum ratio on ideological considerations?
Or is it more important to ensure efficient administration by preventing flight of outstanding talent from Government?

5. Relativities
5.1 Employees in the Secretariat and analogous
establishments are entitled to higher pay scales than the corresponding field functionaries. This was supposed to compensate them for the loss of certain facilities available to them in field assignments and the extra effort required for decision-making at the policy level. Are these factors
valid even today particularly in the context of
decentralization and devolution of administrative powers?
Is this discrimination between field and secretariat
 functionaries even justified today?

6. Group-A Services
6.1 Is there a case for a Unified Civil Service, merging
 therein all Central (both technical and non-technical)
and All India Services, allowing vertical and horizontal movement?
 Or should there be two distinct streams, one embracing all the technical services and the other for non-technical services?

6.2 Do you feel that the pattern of pay scales for all Group A Services should be redesignated so as to attract candidates of the requisite caliber? Keeping in view some of the compensation packages being offered to fresh professionals by the private sector, what emoluments would you suggest for an entrant to a Group-A Service in Government?

7. Professional personnel
7.1 Should there be a higher compensation package for scientists in certain specialized streams/departments like Department of Space, Department of Atomic Energy? If so, what should be the reasonable package in their case?

8. Classification of posts
8.1 Presently, civilian posts in the Central Government are classified into four Groups (‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ & ‘D’) with reference to their scales of pay. The Fifth Central Pay Commission had recommended their reclassification into Executive, Supervisory, Supporting and Auxiliary Staff.
Would you suggest any changes in the existing
classification or should the classification recommended by
Fifth Central Pay Commission be adopted with/without modifications?

9. Restructuring of Group ‘C’ & ‘D’ posts
9.1 Should all lower Group ‘C’ functionaries in the Secretariat be replaced by multi-functional Executive Assistants, who would be graduates and well versed in office work, secretarial skills and use of modern office equipment including computers? Should similar arrangements can be evolved for Group ‘C’ posts in other organisations of Government?

9.2 Should a similar regrouping of Group D staff into fewer categories capable of performing diverse functions also be carried out?

10. Pay Scales
10.1 How should a pay scale be structured? What is a reasonable ratio between the minimum and maximum
of a pay scale?

10.2 The successive Pay Commissions have progressively reduced the number of distinct pay scales. The number of scales has therefore come down from more than 500 scales at the time of the Second Central Pay Commission to 51 scales before Fifth Central Pay Commission, which was
brought down to 33 scales by the Fifth Central Pay Commission. The reduction in the number of pay scales brings in attendant problems like the promotion and the feeder grades coming to lie in the same pay scale, etc. Do you feel whether the existing number of pay scales should be retained or increased or decreased or whether the same should be replaced by a running pay scale?

11. Increments
11.1 What should be the criteria for determining the rates and frequency of increments in respect of different scales of pay? Should these bear a uniform or varying relationship with the minima and/or maxima of the scales?

12. Revision of pay scales
12.1 Is there any need to revise the pay scales periodically especially when 100% neutralization for inflation is available in form of dearness allowance?

12.2 How should pay be fixed in the revised pay scales? Should there be a point-to-point fixation? If not, please suggest a method by which it can be ensured that senior personnel are not placed at a disadvantage vis-à-vis their juniors and due weightage is given for the longer service rendered by the former.

13. Compensatory Allowances
13.1 Is City Compensatory Allowance a sufficient compensation for the problems of a large city? If DA and HRA provide full neutralization, do you think CCA should continue? Is there a need for changing the basis of classification of cities and the rates of CCA? If so, please suggest the revised basis and rates.

14. Pay and perquisites for Armed Forces
14.1 What should be the basis for determination of pay scales for Armed Forces Personnel? What percentage weightage should be assigned to (i) parity with civil services, (ii) comparison with private sector, (iii) special and hazardous nature of duties, (iv) short career span and (v) restricted rights?

14.2 How should the pay of a soldier, sailor and airman be determined? How should it relate to the minimum wage in Government and the pay of a constable in paramilitary or internal security forces?

15. Abolition of feudalism
15.1 Should all vestiges of feudalism in the country like huge residential bungalows sprawling over several acres, large number of servants’ quarters, retinues of personal staff, bungalow peons, use of uniformed personnel as batmen or on unnecessary security or ceremonial duties etc. be abolished? Please make concrete suggestions.

16. Specific proposals
16.1 In what manner can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more professional, citizen-friendly and delivery oriented?

16.2 Please outline specific proposals, which could result in:

(i) Reduction and redeployment of staff,
(ii) Reduction of paper work,
(iii) Better work environment,
(iv) Economy in expenditure,
(v) Professionalisation of services,
(vi) Reduction in litigation on service matters,
(vii) Better delivery of service by government agencies to their users.

17. New concepts
17.1 Do you think the concepts of contractual appointment, part-time work, flexible job description, flexi time etc. need to be introduced in Government to change the environment, provide more jobs and impart flexibility to the working conditions of employees?

17.2 For improving punctuality/introducing new concepts like flexi time, should biometric entry/exit be introduced?

17.3 What steps should be taken to ensure that scientists, doctors, engineers and other professionals with sophisticated education and skills are retained in their specialized fields in Government? Should they be appointed on contract with a higher status and initial pay, advance increments, better service conditions, etc.?

17.4 Should there be lateral movement from Government to non-Government jobs and vice versa? If so, in which sphere(s) and to what extent?

17.5 It has been suggested that existing Government employees should be encouraged to shift to employment on contract for specified periods in return for a substantially higher remuneration package. Would you agree?

18. Performance Appraisal
18.1 In what way should be present system of performance appraisal be changed? Should be ACR be an open document?

18.2 How far has the introduction of self-assessment helped in the process of appraisal?

18.3 Should appraisal be done for an entire team instead of for individuals?

18.4 In what manner can Government employees be made personally accountable for their acts of omission or commission, without any special safeguards? Would you recommend any amendments to Article 311 of the Constitution, Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 17 and 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and various rules relating to conduct of Government servants and disciplinary proceedings?

19. Holidays
19.1 Kindly comment on the appropriateness of adopting a five-day week in Government offices when other sectors follow a six day week. Please also state whether the number of Gazetted holidays in Government offices should be reduced? Please also comment on the appropriateness of declaring Gazetted holidays for all major religious festivals.

19.2 What do you think is the state of work ethics and punctuality in Government offices? Kindly suggest ways of improving these.



1. Salaries
1.1 The considerations on which the minimum salary in case of the lowest Group ‘C’ functionary and the maximum salary in case of a Secretary level officer may be determined and what should be the reasonable ratio between the two.

1.2 What should be the considerations for determining salary for various levels of functions falling between the highest level and the lowest level functionaries?

2. Comparisons
2.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the private sector? If so, why? If not, why not?

2.2 Should there at all be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the public sector? If so, why? If not, why not?

2.3 The concept of variable pay has been introduced in Central Public Sector Enterprises by the Second Pay Revision Committee. In the case of the Government is there merit in introducing a variable component of pay? Can such variable pay be linked to performance?

3. Attracting Talent
3.1 Does the present compensation package attract suitable talent in the All India Services & Group A Services? What are your observations and suggestions in this regard?

3.2 To what extent should government compensation be structured to attract special talent?

4. Pay Scales
4.1 The 6th Central Pay Commission introduced the system of Pay Bands and Grade Pay as against the system of specific pay scales attached to various posts. What has been the impact of running pay bands post implementation of 6th CPC recommendations?

4.2 Is there any need to bring about any change?

4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the Sixth CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the Government?

4.4 Successive Pay Commissions have reduced the number of pay scales by merging one or two pay scales together. Is there a case for the number of pay scales/ pay band to be rationalized and if so in what manner?

4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working? If not, what are your alternative suggestions?

5. Increment
5.1 Whether the present system of annual increment on 1st July of every year uniformly in case of all employees has served its purpose or not? Whether any changes are required?

5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of annual increment?

5.3 Whether there should be a provision of variable increments at a rate higher than the normal annual increment in case of high achievers? If so, what should be transparent and objective parameters to assess high achievement, which could be uniformly applied across Central Government?

5.4 Under the MACP scheme three financial up-gradations are allowed on completion of 10, 20, 30 years of regular service, counted from the direct entry grade. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the scheme? Is there a perception that a scheme of this nature, in some Departments, actually incentivizes people who do not wish to take the more arduous route of qualifying departmental examinations/ or those obtaining professional degrees?

6. Performance
What kind of incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?

7. Impact on other organizations
Salary structures in the Central and State Governments are broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions. To what extent should their paying capacity be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Govt. employees?

8. Defence Forces
8.1 What should be the considerations for fixing salary in case of Defence personnel and in what manner does the parity with civil services need to be evolved, keeping in view their respective job profiles?

8.2 In what manner should the concessions and facilities, both in cash and kind, be taken into account for determining salary structure in case of Defence Forces personnel.

8.3 As per the November 2008 orders of the Ministry of Defence, there are a total of 45 types of allowances for Personnel Below Officer Rank and 39 types of allowances for Officers. Does a case exist for rationalization/ streamlining of the current variety of allowances?

8.4 What are the options available for addressing the increasing expenditure on defence pensions?

8.5 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to war widows?

8.6 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to disabled soldiers, commensurate to the nature of their disability?

9. Allowances
9.1 Whether the existing allowances need to be retained or rationalized in such a manner as to ensure that salary structure takes care not only of the job profile but the situational factors as well, so that the number of allowances could be at a realistic level?

9.2 What should be the principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?

10. Pension
10.1 The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 a re covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?

10.2 As far as pre-1.1.2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and other retirement benefits?

11. Strengthening the public governance system
11.1 The 6th CPC recommended upgrading the skills of the Group D employees and placing them in Group C over a period of time. What has been the experience in this regard?

11.2 In what way can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more efficient, accountable and responsible? Please give specific suggestions with respect to:

a) Rationalisation of staff strength and more productive deployment of available staff;

b) Rationalisation of processes and reduction of paper work; and

c) Economy in expenditure.

12. Training/ building competence
12.1 How would you interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?

12.2 One of the terms of reference suggests that the Commission recommend appropriate training and capacity building through a competency based framework.

a) Is the present level of training at various stages of a person’s career considered adequate? Are there gaps that need to be filled, and if so, where?

b) Should it be made compulsory that each civil service officer should in his career span acquire a professional qualification? If so, can the nature of the study, time intervals and the Institution(s) whose qualification are acceptable, all be stipulated?

c) What other indicators can best measure training and capacity building for personnel in your organization? Please suggest ways through which capacity building can be further strengthened?

13. Outsourcing
13.1 What has been the experience of outsourcing at various levels of Government and is there a case for streamlining it?

13.2 Is there a clear identification of jobs that can be outsourced?

14. Regulatory Bodies
14.1 Kindly list out the Regulators set up unde r Acts of Parliament, related to your Ministry/ Department. The total number of personnel on rolls (Chairperson and members + support personnel) may be indicated.

14.2 Regulators that may not qualify in terms of being set up under Acts of Parliament but perform regulatory functions may also be listed. The scale of pay for Chairperson /Members and other personnel of such bodies may be indicated.

14.3 Across the Government there are a host of Regulatory bodies set up for various purposes. What are your suggestions regarding emoluments structure for Regulatory bodies?

15. Payment of Bonus
One of the terms of reference of the 7th Pay Commission is to examine the existing schemes of payment of bonus. What are your suggestions and observations in this regard?





Continue Reading »

Payment of Conveyance Allowance to Deaf and Dumb employees at par with Blind and Orthopeadically Handicapped employees.

File No. 3/5/2007-SCT(B)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Financial Services
(Welfare)
New Delhi, dated 11th April, 2014.
To

1. The Chief Executives of all Public Sector Banks,
Public Sector Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions
2. Executive Director, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai.

Subject: Payment of Conveyance Allowance to Deaf and Dumb employees at par with Blind and Orthopeadically Handicapped employees.

Sir,

I am directed to refer to the subject cited above and to say that as per this Department's letter of even number dated 18.2.2009, Conveyance Allowance is payable to Blind and Orthopeadically handicapped employees n Public Sector Banks, Public Sector Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions and Reserve Bank of India, as per prescribed rates.

2. Department of Expenditure in the Ministry of Finance vide its Office Memorandum No. 21(2)/2011-Estt..II(B) dated 19th February, 2014(copy enclosed), has informed that in compliance with order dated 12th December, 2013 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in WP(Civil) No. 107 of 2011, titled Deaf Employees Welfare Association and Anothers Vs Union of India and Others, it has been decided to extend the benefit of Transport Allowance, as admissible to Blind and Orthopeadically Handicapped employees in terms of their OM No. 21(2)/2008-E.II(B) dated 29th August, 2008(copy enclosed), to deaf and dumb employees of the Central Government with immediate effect.

3. The matter was examined in this Department and it has been decided to extend these benefits to deaf and dumb employees of Public Sector Banks, Public Sector Insurance Companies, Financial Institutions and Reserve Bank of India etc. subject to the condition that the recommendation of the Head of ENT Department of a Govt. Civil Hospital is received by the Head of Human Resources Department of the respective financial institution and fulfillment of other conditions mentioned in MoF, Deptt. of Expenditure OM No. 19029/1/78-E.IV(B) dated 31st August, 1978 (copy enclosed) read with OM dated 29.8.2008.

4. It is requested that a Board Note for paying Conveyance Allowance as prescribed in the letter referred above to Deaf and Dumb employees, at par with Blind and Orthopeadically handicapped employees in your organization, be placed before your Board of Directors for implementation, with immediate effect.

Yours faithfully,
sd/-
(J.S. Phaugat)
Under Secretary(Welfare)

Source: http://financialservices.gov.in/ncapp/Document.aspx

Continue Reading »

AIRF's agenda for discussion in National Council (JCM)

No.NC-JCM/2014/VII CPC
Dated: April 9, 2014 
The Chairman,
Standing Committee National Council(JCM),
South Block, New Delhi

Dear Sir,

Sub: Agenda for discussion in the Standing  Committee of National Council(JCM)
9
An agenda, comprising of 09 items, to be discussed in the Standing Committee of the National Council(JCM), is being enclosed herewith for necessary action.

Yours faithfully, 
-sd- 
(Shiva Gopal Mishra) 
Secretary, Staff Side 
National Council(JCM)
DA/As above



Copy to: All Constituent Organisations of the National Council(JCM) – for information.

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE 7th CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION 

The Government of India have finalized the Terms of Reference of the 7th CPC and circulated the same vide Ministry of Finance’s Resolution No1/1/2013-E.III (A) dated 28th February, 2014. It is a matter of concern that and disappointment that the Terms of Reference have been finalised unilaterally without having thorough discussion with the Staff Side and their views have also not been taken care of while doing so.  

It may be recalled that a meeting was convened by the Secretary (Personnel) with the Staff Side members on 24th October, 2013 to discuss the possible Terms of Reference for the 7th CPC being appointed. In that meeting the Staff side had specifically requested that a copy of Terms of Reference for 7th CPC, as proposed by the Ministry of Finance may be circulated to all concerned and thereafter another meeting with Secretary, Department of Expenditure and Department of Personnel & Training be arranged with the Staff Side to discuss and finalise the same, which is clearly mentioned in para 11 of the Record Note of Discussion of that meeting. Subsequently, the Staff Side again requested for an urgent meeting with the Secretary(Expenditure) and Secretary DoPT for finalization of the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Seventh Central Pay Commission vide its letter dated 23rd January, 2014. However, no such meeting was convened and Terms of Reference for the 7th CPC have been finalised by the Government on 28th February, 2014.

While going through the ToR, as finalized by the Government, it is observed that many of the suggestions of the Staff Side, in regard to date of effect of Pay Commission, Merger of D.A., Interim Relief, representation of labour representative in the Commission itself, parity issues in regard to pensioners, settlement of the pending Anomaly items etc., have not been duly considered, which is a matter of dissatisfaction.

The Staff Side, therefore, demands that the Government must discuss the Terms of Reference for the 7th CPC with them and make necessary amendments/revisions to the Terms of Reference.

1. Revision of Wage with effect from 01.01.2011 

The present wage structure of the Central Government employees is in vogue on the basis of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission, which took effect from 01.01.2006 in the case of Pay, and in the case of Allowances from 01.09. 2008. 

The wage revision of the Central Government employees is done every 10 years, which was recommended by the 5th CPC, however, in the case of Central PUSs, the wage revision normally takes place after every five years. In the past, wage revision has been linked to the extent of erosion of real wages. The degree of inflation in the economy determines the pace of erosion of the real value of wages. The retail prices of those commodities which are computed for determining the minimum wages have risen by about 160% from 01.01.2006 to 01.01. 2011, whereas the D.A. compensation, in the case of Central Government employees, on that date had been just 51%.

Since wage revision in all the Central Public Sector Undertakings takes places every five years through collective bargaining, revision of wages of the Central Government employees in 10 years gives rise to serious disparity in wages and allowances of the Central Government employees, vis-a-vis those in Public Sector Undertakings, which is a major cause of discontentment among them. The Staff Side, therefore, demands that the wage revision of the Central Government employees must also take place after every 5 years on the analogy of CPUSs and therefore, Government must specify the date of effect of the recommendations of the 7th CPC accordingly, i.e. to take effect from 01.01.2011 in place of 01.01.2016.

2. Merger of DA with Pay 

The wage revision of the Central Government employees takes place only through setting up of Central Pay Commissions, which has many a times proved to be a time consuming process. The 6th CPC submitted its report in the time frame provided to it, i.e. 18 months. Since the earlier Commissions had covered many aspects of the principles of wage determination and the periodicity of such revision had come down, the exercise might not now require a longer period of time as was the case earlier, still the 7th CPC shall require a reasonable time frame to go into the matter judiciously because the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC have given rise to large number of anomalies and cadre related grievances.

The methodology adopted for compensating the erosion in the real value of wages in the interregnum period had always been though the mechanism of merger of a portion of DA. The 5th CPC had recommended that the DA must be merged with pay and treated as pay for computing all allowances as and when the percentage of Dearness compensation exceeds 50%. Accordingly even before the setting up of the 6th CPC the DA to the extent of 50% was merged with pay.

As on 1.1.2014, the Dearness compensation is 100%. The suggestion for merger of DA to partially compensate the erosion in the real wages was first mooted by the Gadgil Committee in the post 2nd Pay Commission period. The 3rd CPC had recommended such merger when the Cost of Living index crossed over 272 points i.e. 72 points over and above the base index adopted for the pay revision. In other words, the recommendation of the 3rd CPC was to merge the DA when it crossed 36%. The Government in the National Council JCM at the time of negotiation initially agreed to merge 60% DA and later the whole of the DA before the 4th CPC was set up. The 5th CPC merged 98% of DA with pay. It is, therefore, necessary that the Government takes steps to merge atleast 50% of DA with pay to compensate the erosion of the real value of wages immediately.

3. Appointment on compassionate grounds under the Central Government  

Under the pretext of Hon’ble Supreme Court directives, the Central Government introduced a 5% ceiling on compassionate ground appointment. On account of this ceiling limit of 5%, a large number of cases of appointment on compassionate grounds of the dependents of the deceased Central Government employees have been pending in different departments, with the result that, the bereaved families of the late employees are constraints to face undue hardship due to loss of bread winner. Some of such candidates, belonging to Department of Posts, approached the Hon’ble Court of Law and obtained favourable orders, however, these directives have not been acted upon. The Government has chosen to dillydally by filing SLP in the Supreme Court.

It may be recalled that, the Central Administrative Tribunals were established with the intention of expeditious settlement of disputes on service matters. Even recently the Prime Minister's office ordered that it would not be open for various Ministries to appeal against the orders of the Tribunal as a matter of course and efforts must be to explore the ways of acceptances of the judgements of the Tribunal. In the light of these directives, the SLP ought to have been withdrawn.

It is pertinent to further mention here that, the standing Committee on Department of Personnel in one of their reports has termed the scheme of compassionate ground appointments as a sacred assurance to a fresh entrant that if he dies in harness, his family shall not be left in lurch. Such an assurance is being breached by the provisions of limiting such appointments to 5% of vacancies.

The Staff Side is, therefore, of the firm view that this condition of 5% ceiling must be done away with to provide relief to the bereaved families of the deceased Central Government employees.

4. Regularisation of Casual/Contingent/Daily Rate workers 

Due to ban on creation of posts and recruitment of personnel that continued for a very long period and the consequent strain on the existing workers, many departmental heads had to recruit personnel on daily rated basis or as casual workers. Thus, almost 25% of the present workforce in the Governmental organisations are casual workers deployed to do permanent and perennial nature of jobs, contrary to the prohibition of such unfair labour practices by the law of the land. In the fifties and sixties, even the casual workers who had been employed to do casual and non perennial jobs used to get priority for regular employment as and when vacancies for such permanent recruitment arise. It is, however, a matter of concern that thousands of persons are now recruited as casual workers and kept as such for years together and are paid pittance of a salary with no benefits, like Provident Fund, Dearness Allowance, other Compensatory Allowances etc. In order to ensure that they do not get the benefit of regularisation, these workers  are technically discharged for a few days to be employed afresh again. The modus operandi differs from one department to another. While in some organisations, they are recruited through Employment Exchanges, in others, the functions are contracted out. Not only the quality of work suffers, but it is also an inhuman exploitation of the workers given the serious situation of unemployment that exists in the country. While the permanent solution is to sanction the necessary posts and resort to regular recruitment, the Government should evolve a scheme by which these casual/contingent/daily rated workers are made regular workers with all the concomitant benefits available for regular Government employees. Pending finalisation of such a scheme for regularisation, the non regular employees recruited for meeting the exigencies of work must be paid pro-rata salary on par with similarly placed regular employees on the principle of equal pay for equal work.

5. Downsizing, Outsourcing, Contractorisation etc. 

To overcome the difficulties emanated from the total ban on recruitment and creation of posts and more specifically impacted by the 2001 executive fiat of the Government of India in the matter, many departments had to resort to outsourcing of its functions. Some were virtually closed down and a few others were privatised or contractorised. The large scale outsourcing and contractorisation of functions had a telling effect on the efficacy of the Government departments. The delivery system was adversely affected and the public at large suffered due to the inordinate delay it caused in getting the requisite service. The financial outlay for outsourcing of functions of each department increased enormously over the years, as a consequence of which, the quality of work suffered. In order to ensure that the people do get a better and efficient service from the Government departments and to raise the image of the Government employees in the eyes of the common people, it is necessary that the present scheme of outsourcing and contractorisation of essential functions of the Government must be abandoned. The practice of outsourcing and contractorisation is nothing but a cruel exploitation of the alarming situation of unemployment. The system of outsourcing of the functions seeks to informalise the workforce. The contract/casual workers get not even one third of the salary of the regular work force. They have no social security benefits like pension, provident fund gratuity etc. The Central Government employees fought against the temporary service rules which was in vogue in sixties and ensured that the recruitment to Government service is permanent and the civil servants are not allowed to be fired at the whim and fancy of their bosses. The outsourcing and contractorisation has paved way for large scale entry of casual workers and has resulted in the reversal of what all achieved in this direction through struggles in the past two decades.

The prevalent system of outsourcing and contractorisation, therefore, needs to be abandoned and all the regular and perennial nature works should be entrusted on regular Government employees only.
 
6. Revising Overtime Allowance(OTA) and Night Duty Allowance Rates 

It may be seen that the Overtime Allowance is seldom paid to the Government employees. It is only in case of emergency and in the contingency in which the work cannot be postponed, like that happens in the Railways in smooth running of trains round the clock, in the RMS Division of Postal Department, in the Atomic Energy Commission offices or when the Parliament is in session in other administrative offices, employees are asked to do work beyond the stipulated working hours. The Night Duty Allowance is, however, paid to Government employees who have to work in night shifts with certain stipulated conditions. The 4th CPC recommended that since there had been considerable misuse of the provisions relating to grant of OTA, the Government should find alternative methods to compensate the employees who are asked to work on over time and pending such a scheme being evolved recommended not to revise the rates. However, the Government did not bring in any new scheme but issued the directive that the OTA and Night duty allowance will be paid to the employees who are called upon to do overtime or night duty on the basis of the 4th CPC pay structure. This directive is still in vogue.

Owing to certain disagreements with the Government on these issues, this matter was referred to Board of Arbitration under the JCM Scheme, whereupon the Board of Arbitration, having found unreasonable position taken by the Government, gave out the award in favour of the staff and directed the Government to revise the order whereby the allowance will be linked to the actual pay of the Government employees. The Government did not accept this award and decided to approach the Parliament for rejection of the same. The matter has not yet been placed in the form of a resolution in the Parliament. Despite the fact that the employees had been abiding by the directive of their superiors to be on overtime/night duty, and despite having won the case before the Board of Arbitration they continue to be compensated on the basis of the Notional pay as in 1986. There cannot be a much bigger injustice meted out to the employees. The Government must accept the award of the Board and issue instructions linking the Allowance to the actual pay of the employee.

7. Stepping up of pay of seniors who are drawing less pay than the juniors consequent on fixation of pay due to implementation of 6th CPC recommendations between Direct Recruits and Promotees  

Consequent upon implementation of the recommendations of the VI CPC, in respect of pay scales of various categories of staff, there are certain situations where the senior who were promoted before 01.01.2006 are getting lesser pay than their juniors promoted after 01.01.2006, on fixation of their pay w.e.f. 01.01.2006. This, being a serious anomaly, has been raised by different department in their Departmental Anomalies Committees for redressal thereof. While clarifications regarding stepping up of pay of senior who are drawing less pay than the juniors between Direct Recruitees and Promotees, i.e. the seniors and juniors placed in a pay scale, having some Direct Recruitment Quota, have already been issued, whereby seniors’ pay has been stepped up and equated to the juniors. However, in grades where there is no element of Direct Recruitment available, this provision has not been made till date, with the result that, the seniors are still drawing lesser pay than their juniors after fixation of their pay in new pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, which, being a serious anomaly, is resulting in discontentment prevailing among the seniors.

The main incongruity in this case is basically due to the fact that it is for the first time that the 6th CPC has recommended specific entry level pay for Direct Recruits (DRs). This has resulted in employees who were appointed in service prior to the DRs and got promoted earlier are getting less pay as compared to their counterparts recruited directly and who joined after 1.1.2006. It has always been the case that on promotion, the pay of a promoted employee is never fixed at less than the entry level of pay of that post as admissible to a direct recruit.

The Staff Side, therefore, is of the firm view that orders need to be issued to the effect that the pay on promotion w.e.f. 01.01.2006 would not be fixed less than at the prescribed minimum of the Entry Pay as provided for the Direct Entrants in the Revised Pay Rules, to eliminate this anomalous situation.

8. Stepping up of pay of senior employees at par with their juniors consequent upon implementation of MACPS  

The Modified Assured Progression Scheme(MACPS) came into effect on 01.09.2008, and prior to this, Assured Career Progression(ACP) was in vogue. There are number of cases where the seniors who were promoted before implementation of the MACPS and the juniors who could not get normal promotion due to non-availability of vacancy or otherwise, and were extended the benefit of financial upgradation under MACPS on fulfillment of conditions laid down therein, the seniors are drawing lesser pay than their juniors under this scheme.

The MACP Scheme does not stipulate the provision of stepping up of pay of the seniors at par with their juniors, in case the seniors getting lesser pay than their juniors, which is absolutely unjustified and discriminative.

The Staff Side has repeatedly raised this issue in the MACPS’s Anomaly Committee as well, however, this discrepancy has not been done away with till date, with the result that, the seniors are still drawing lesser pay than their juniors, having been extended the benefit of financial upgradation under MACPS and this is causing deep sense of frustration prevailing among the seniors.

Staff Side, therefore, is of the firm opinion that the above-mentioned discrepancy needs to be addressed at the earliest to provide relief to the seniors.

9. Granting of Additional Pay to Loco & Traffic Running Staff  

On the basis of recommendations of the 6th CPC, Additional Pay of Rs.1000 p.m. with appropriate Dearness Allowance has been granted in favour of Loco Pilot(Mail/Express)/Sr. Motorman(PB-II, GP Rs.4200)/(Rs.6000-9800)(5th CPC). Similarly, Rs.500 has been granted to Loco Pilot(Passenger II/ Motorman)(PB-II, GP Rs.4200)/(Rs.5500-9000)(5th CPC) and Guard(Mail/Exp.)(PB-II, GP Rs.4200) (Rs.5500-9000)(5th CPC). But the same Additional Pay has not been granted to rest of the Loco & Traffic Running Staff, causing great injustice to these set of Loco & Traffic Running Staff.

It would be quite appropriate that the Additional Pay should be granted in favour of all other categories of Loco & Traffic Running Staff.

Source: AIRF
Continue Reading »

7th CPC Questionnaire released and expect views on various aspects on 7th Pay Commission.

Meena Agarwal
Secretary

D.O No. 7CPC/15/Questionnaire
9th April, 2014 

Dear ………..,

As you may be aware the Seventh Central Pay Commissions has been constituted by the Government on 28 February 2014 with a view to go into various issues of emoluments’ structure, retirement benefits and other service conditions of Central Government employees and to make recommendations on the changes required. The terms of reference of the Seventh Central Pay Commission are available on the http://.www.7cpc.india.gov.in.

2. A Questionnaire seeking the considered views of all stakeholders is enclosed. The response of your Ministry to this Questionnaire is sought. I shall be grateful if the replies are furnished to the Commission on or before 10th May, 2014, so as to enable the Commission to take them into account as part of its examination of the issues that it is mandated to address. The reply may be sent to Post Box No. 4599, Hauz Khas P.O, New Delhi 110 016, and in the case of email to secy-7cpc@nic.in.


Encl:- As above.

With Regards,

Yours sincerely, 

(Meena Agarwal) 
To all Secretaries to Govt of India  

 7th CPC Questionnaire  
1. Salaries 

1.1 The considerations on which the minimum salary in case of the lowest Group ‘C’ functionary and the maximum salary in case of a Secretary level officer may be determined and what should be the reasonable ratio between the two.

1.2 What should be the considerations for determining salary for various levels of functions falling between the highest level and the lowest level functionaries?

2. Comparisons 

2.1 Should there be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the private sector? If so, why? If not, why not?

2.2 Should there at all be any comparison/parity between pay scales and perquisites between Government and the public sector? If so, why? If not, why not?

2.3 The concept of variable pay has been introduced in Central Public Sector Enterprises by the Second Pay Revision Committee. In the case of the Government is there merit in introducing a variable component of pay? Can such variable pay be linked to performance?

3. Attracting Talent 

3.1 Does the present compensation package attract suitable talent in the All India Services & Group A Services? What are your observations and suggestions in this regard?

3.2 To what extent should government compensation be structured to attract special talent?

4. Pay Scales 

4.1 The 6th Central Pay Commission introduced the system of Pay Bands and Grade Pay as against the system of specific pay scales attached to various posts. What has been the impact of running pay bands post implementation of 6th CPC recommendations?

4.2 Is there any need to bring about any change?

4.3 Did the pay bands recommended by the Sixth CPC help in arresting exodus and attract talent towards the Government?
 
 4.4 Successive Pay Commissions have reduced the number of pay scales by merging one or two pay scales together. Is there a case for the number of pay scales/ pay band to be rationalized and if so in what manner?

4.5 Is the “grade pay” concept working? If not, what are your alternative suggestions?

5. Increment 

5.1 Whether the present system of annual increment on 1 st  July of every year uniformly in case of all employees has served its purpose or not? Whether any changes are required?

5.2 What should be the reasonable quantum of annual increment?

5.3 Whether there should be a provision of variable increments at a rate higher than the normal annual increment in case of high achievers? If so, what should be transparent and objective parameters to assess high achievement, which could be uniformly applied across Central Government?

5.4 Under the MACP scheme three financial up-gradations are allowed on completion of 10, 20, 30 years of regular service, counted from the direct entry grade. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the scheme? Is there a perception that a scheme of this nature, in some Departments, actually incentivizes people who do not wish to take the more arduous route of qualifying departmental examinations/ or those obtaining professional degrees?

6. Performance 

What kind of incentives would you suggest to recognize and reward good performance?

7. Impact on other organizations 

Salary structures in the Central and State Governments are broadly similar. The recommendations of the Pay Commission are likely to lead to similar demands from employees of State Governments, municipal bodies, panchayati raj institutions & autonomous institutions. To what extent should their paying capacity be considered in devising a reasonable remuneration package for Central Govt. employees?

8. Defence Forces 

8.1 What should be the considerations for fixing salary in case of Defence personnel and in what manner does the parity with civil services need to be evolved, keeping in view their respective job profiles?

8.2 In what manner should the concessions and facilities, both in cash and kind, be taken into account for determining salary structure in case of Defence Forces personnel.

8.3 As per the November 2008 orders of the Ministry of Defence, there are a total of 45 types of allowances for Personnel Below Officer Rank and 39 types of allowances for Officers. Does a case exist for rationalization/ streamlining of the current variety of allowances?

8.4 What are the options available for addressing the increasing expenditure on defence pensions?

8.5 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to war widows?

8.6 As a measure of special recognition, is there a case to review the present benefits provided to disabled soldiers, commensurate to the nature of their disability?

9. Allowances 

9.1 Whether the existing allowances need to be retained or rationalized in such a manner as to ensure that salary structure takes care not only of the job profile but the situational factors as well, so that the number of allowances could be at a realistic level?

9.2 What should be the principles to determine payment of House Rent Allowance?

10. Pension 

10.1 The retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on or after 1.1.2004 a re covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS). What has been the experience of the NPS in the last decade?

10.2 As far as pre-1.1.2004 appointees are concerned, what should be the principles that govern the structure of pension and other retirement benefits?

11. Strengthening the public governance system 

11.1 The 6th CPC recommended upgrading the skills of the Group D employees and placing them in Group C over a period of time. What has been the experience in this regard?

11.2 In what way can Central Government organizations functioning be improved to make them more efficient, accountable and responsible? Please give specific suggestions with respect to:

 a) Rationalisation of staff strength and more productive deployment of available staff;  

b) Rationalisation of processes and reduction of paper work; and c) Economy in expenditure.

12. Training/ building competence 

12.1 How would you interpret the concept of “competency based framework”?

12.2 One of the terms of reference suggests that the Commission recommend appropriate training and capacity building through a competency based framework.

a) Is the present level of training at various stages of a person's career considered adequate? Are there gaps that need to be filled, and if so, where?
b) Should it be made compulsory that each civil service officer should in his career span acquire a professional qualification? If so, can the nature of the study, time intervals and the Institution(s) whose qualification are acceptable, all be stipulated?
c) What other indicators can best measure training and capacity building for personnel in your organization? Please suggest ways through which capacity building can be further strengthened?

13. Outsourcing 

13.1 What has been the experience of outsourcing at various levels of Government and is there a case for streamlining it?

13.2 Is there a clear identification of jobs that can be outsourced?

14. Regulatory Bodies 

14.1 Kindly list out the Regulators set up unde r Acts of Parliament, related to your Ministry/ Department. The total number of personnel on rolls (Chairperson and members + support personnel) may be indicated.

14.2 Regulators that may not qualify in terms of being set up under Acts of Parliament but perform regulatory functions may also be listed. The scale of pay for Chairperson /Members and other personnel of such bodies may be indicated.

14.3 Across the Government there are a host of Regulatory bodies set up for various purposes. What are your suggestions regarding emoluments structure for Regulatory bodies?

15. Payment of Bonus 

One of the terms of reference of the 7th Pay Commission is to examine the existing schemes of payment of bonus. What are your suggestions and observations in this regard?

Source: http://7cpc.india.gov.in/7cpc_questionnaire.pdf
Continue Reading »

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Payment of Dearness Allowance to Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS).

No. 14-01/2011-PAP
Government of India
Ministry of Communication & IT
Department of Posts
(Establishment Division)/P.A.P. Section
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi — 110 001.
Dated 16th April, 2014.
To,
All Chief Postmaster General
All G.Ms. (PAF)/Directors of Accounts (Posts).

Subject: Payment of Dearness Allowance to Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS) at revised rates w.e.f. 01.01.2014 onwards — reg.

Consequent upon grant of another installment of Dearness Allowance, with effect from 1st January, 2014 to the Central Government Employees vide Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure's O.M. No. 1/1/2014-E-I1 (B) dated27.03.2014, duly endorsed vide this Department's letter No. 8-1/2012-PAP (Pt.) dated 28.3.2014, the Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDS) have also become entitled to the payment of Dearness Allowances on basic TRCA at the revised rate with effect from 01.01.2014. It has, therefore, been decided that the Dearness Allowance payable to the Gramin Dak Sevaks shall be enhanced from the existing rate of 90% to 100% on the basic Time Related Continuity Allowance, with effect from the 1st January, 2014.

2. The additional installment of Dearness Allowance payable under this order shall be paid in cash to all Gramin Dak Sevaks.

3. The expenditure on this account shall be debited to the Head "Salaries" under the relevant head of account and should be met from the sanctioned grant.

4. This issues with the concurrence of Integrated Finance Wing vide their Diary No98/FA/2014-CS dated 16/04/2014.

(Shankar Prasad)
Assistant Director General (Estt.)

Source:http://nfpe.blogspot.in/
Continue Reading »

FAQ on Grievance Redress Mechanism in Government of India

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM IN GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND THE ROLE OF DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES, NEW DELHI, THEREIN


Sl. No.   Question  Response
 1  What is the postal address of the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances?

 Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances, 5th floor, Sardar Patel Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi – 110001.
Website: www.darpg.gov.in
Tele fax – 23741006
 2  What is the organization structure of grievance redress in Government of India?

 The organization structure comprises of the following nodal agencies for receiving grievances from the citizens :
(a) The Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances.(DAR&PG) (http://pgportal.gov.in)
(b) The Public Wing in Rashtrapati Bhawan Secretariat. (http://helpline.rb.nic.in)
(c) The Public Wing in the Prime Minister’s Office. d) The Directorate of Public Grievances in Cabinet Secretariat. (DPG) (http://dpg.gov.in) e) The Department of Pensions and Pensioners’ Welfare.(DP&PW) (http://pgportal.gov.in/pension/)
All the above nodal agencies receive grievances online through http://pgportal.gov.in as well as by post or by hand in person, from the public.

The grievances received online in the Public Wing of Rashtrapati Bhawan, the Prime Minister’s Office and the DP&PW, also get converged in the http://pgportal.gov.in (For details please refer to Chapter 1 of the bilingual ‘Compilation of Guidelines for Redress of Public Grievances, August 2010’, accessible on Public Grievance portal as above and under ‘Rules and Manuals’ on www.darpg.gov.in)
 3  What is the mandate of the DAR&PG with regard to grievances?

 As per ‘Allocation of Business Rules 1961’, the following work on grievances is allocated to DAR&PG:-
1. Policy, coordination and monitoring of issues relating to –
(a) Redress of public grievances in general; and
(b) Grievances pertaining to Central Government agencies
 4  What are the requirements for sending of grievances by post?

 In cases where internet facility is not available or even otherwise, the citizen is free to send his grievance by Post. For this, no form is prescribed. The grievance may be written on any plain sheet of paper or on a Postcard / Inland letter and addressed to the Department.
 5  After redress, can the grievance be re-opened for further correspondence about it having been closed without details etc.?

 No. In such situations, the citizen will have to lodge a fresh grievance drawing reference to the closed grievance, and call for details. Sometimes, the details are sent by post and mentioned in the final report. The postal delivery may be awaited before lodging a fresh grievance.
 6  What is the common framework for grievance redress in all Central Ministries / Departments/ Organizations?

 Framework for redress of grievances in all Central Ministries / Departments / Organizations: Every Central Ministry / Department has designated a Joint Secretary or a Director / Deputy Secretary, as its ‘Director of Grievances’.
He / She is the nodal officer for redress of grievances on work areas allocated to that particular Ministry / Department.
 7  What are the contact details of the Nodal Officers of Public Grievances in |Ministries/Department?

 This list is accessible through- out the year on the Department’s website at www.darpg.nic.in and at www.pgportal.gov.in
 8  When was pg portal started?

 Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) is operational since 1/6/2007
 9  What is the purpose and objectives of pgportal?

 Pgportal is an online system for facilitating citizen for lodging of grievances from anywhere, anytime 24x7. The system enables Ministries/Departments close monitoring of the grievances received for expeditious disposal and upload Action Taken Report.
The citizens can view the status of action taken. There is also a feedback mechanism for satisfaction rating by the complainant of the action taken which may lead to further improvements.
 10  What type of Public Grievances are heard by the Department?

 Forenoon of every Wednesday of the week has been earmarked for receiving and hearing of grievances by the Director of Public Grievances in person.
 11  What are the type of grievances which are not taken up for redress by the department?

 (a). Subjudice cases or any matter concerning judgment given by any court.
(b). Personal and family disputes.
(c). RTI matters.
 12  What is the role of Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) with reference to the grievances concerning Central Ministries/Departments/ Organizations?

 The Department of Administrative Reforms & Public Grievances is the chief policy making, monitoring and coordinating Department for public grievances arising from the work of Ministries/Departments/Organizations of the Government of India. The grievances received in the department are forwarded to the Ministries/Departments concerned.

Redressal of grievances is done by respective Ministries/Departments in a decentralized manner. The Department periodically reviews the status of redressal of public grievances under CPGRAMS of Ministries/Departments for speedy disposal of grievances / complaints.
 13  What is the role of Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) with reference to the grievances concerning State Government?

 All grievances relating to State Governments / Union Territory Administrations and Government of NCT Region of Delhi, are to be redressed by the State/ UT/ NCT Government concerned. Citizens are advised to take up matter regarding pendency of their grievances directly with the State Government concerned. In view of federal principle of governance enshrined in the Constitution of India no monitoring is done by the DARPG.
 14  What procedures are used by DARPG to inform the aggrieved citizen?

 On successful lodging of a grievance an acknowledgment is auto generated on the online system. A grievance received by post is acknowledged within three days of the receipt.
A grievance received by hand is acknowledged at the same time After careful scrutiny, the grievances received in the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances are forwarded to the Ministries/ Departments/Organizations/State Governments/ UTs concerned for appropriate action.
The complainant is also informed about the name and address of the officer and the organization to whom the complaint has been forwarded for action.
 15  What is the time limit for redress of grievance?

 60 days as per Guidelines. In case of delay an interim reply with reasons for delay is required to be given.

However, this time limit is not mandatory as the grievance redress mechanism is voluntary in nature.
16   What action can be taken by the citizen in case of non-redress of his grievance within the prescribed time?

 He may take up the matter with the Director of Public Grievances of the Ministry/Department concerned whose details are available on the pgportal.
 17  In case of non-redress of a grievance within the stipulated time of 60 days, what action can be taken against the officer concerned?

No penal provisions have been prescribed in the Guidelines relating to redress of public grievances.

However, in case of any dereliction of duty it is the responsibility of the Ministry/Department concerned, to take disciplinary action against the erring official.

Source: http://darpg.gov.in/darpgwebsite_cms/Document/file/faq-pgportal.pdf
Continue Reading »